ticularly affected my State. My former office manager's father here in Washington, 100-percent disabled, he gets solicited all of the time in the mail for this kind of stuff. It ought to be stopped. This bill, which it was called to my attention because we have got a lot of veterans in Florida, as you know. We have got 1.7 million veterans, and we have got about 245,000 in Florida that are on disability payments, and of course this was called to my attention because of the "get rich quick" kind of scheme. Without me going out and really pushing this legislation, 15 of our colleagues have cosponsored it. A couple of members of this committee have cosponsored. As a matter of fact, another member of this committee that we all have a great deal of respect for as a veteran, Senator McCain, has come to me and wants to help push this legislation. Now I just learned, as I walked in the door, something troubling. I have had enormous cooperation from the Veterans Department on this. As a matter of fact, they have issued press releases on this. I have got all kinds of testimony from former Secretaries of the VA, and the VA Inspector General, and I could quote all of those quotes, and I was just told by the staff walking in here that the VA is going to testify against this legislation because they think that veterans are big boys. Well, veterans are big boys, and they can make up their own minds on things Chairman ROCKEFELLER. And girls. Senator NELSON of Florida. And women. But the fact is, is this is a matter of what was the intention, the legislative intent in the original law, which wanted to honor our veterans and to compensate them for their service to the country. And so I respectfully put it in the wisdom of this committee, Mr. Chairman, to see if you all do not think that this practice needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [The prepared statement of Senator Bill Nelson follows:] PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to appear before the committee to talk about two bills which I have introduced and being discussed today. The first is the Veterans Benefits and Pensions Protection Act. Senator McCain and I introduced this bill to protect our veterans from financial predators who offer “instant cash” in exchange for future pensions or disability pay. Current law prohibits the direct sale of a veteran's pension or disability benefits. These payments are a tax-free, monthly check from the government, meant to provide important financial support to veterans who were disabled or wounded in service to our country. In the state of Florida alone, 245,000 veterans or their survivors received such compensation last year; and the Department of Veterans Affairs paid out nearly $21.3 billion dollars nationwide. To get at this pot of money, some companies have used a loophole that enables them to enter into a contract with veterans and offer them "instant cash" in exchange for future benefits. These contracts require veterans to sign away their disability benefits or pensions for a certain period often eight years. In exchange, companies give them a lumpsum cash payment, typically valued at only thirty cents on the dollar. In certain cases, these companies also require veterans to put up collateral, such as taking out a life insurance policy, potentially leaving a veteran's family out in the cold. The VA has called this practice a "financial scam" and former Secretary of the VA, Hershel Gober, has stated, “These schemes seem to target the most desperate of our veterans. No financial expert on the planet would encourage anyone to accept 30 cents today if they could get a dollar tomorrow. He went on to say, "VA lawyers are still studying the fine print in these schemes to determine whether or not they are legal. Even if they are legal, they're despicable, because they take money away from the people in the direst financial straights.... Doing this to veterans is reprehensible." The VA Inspector General also stated: "For many unsuspecting veterans, these benefit buyouts could be financially devastating." In one case, a veteran received a lump sum of $73,000 in return for his monthly benefit checks of $2,700 over ten years. That's an annual interest rate of 28.5 percent. Mr. Chairman, I find this practice wrong and I'm determined to put a stop to it. My legislation would do just that. The intent of the law that prohibits the assignment of a veteran's benefits is clearly being skirted by companies that offer these instant cash schemes. Our bill expands the definition of assignment of benefits to outlaw these contracts and makes a violation punishable by a stiff fine and up to one year in jail. The second part of this legislation establishes a five-year education and outreach campaign, conducted by the VA, to provide information to veterans about what legitimate financial services are available to them. A bipartisan group of fifteen Senators have joined in support of this legislation, including two distinguished members of this Committee, Senator Murray and Senator Craig. The Disabled American Veterans, Paralyzed Veterans of America, Vietnam Veterans of America, AMVETS, Veterans of Foreign Wars, and The American Legion all have endorsed it as well. I would like to thank the VA General Counsel and the VA's legislative liaison for working with my staff to develop the technical language for this bill. I look forward to having the support of this committee as we move to better protect our veterans from "instant cash" and other financial schemes. 66 I would like to conclude these remarks about this bill with a comment from one of our country's veterans. My pension isn't a lottery winning. It's an award from the American people for serving my country, and it's appalling to think there are those out there that would rob you of this honor and steal your future." The second bill that I have introduced is to rename the Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida in honor Congressional Medal of Honor winner, Command Sergeant Major Franklin D. Miller, United States Army, Retired. Frank Miller faithfully served our country as a soldier for thirty years from 1962 until his retirement in 1992. During much of that time, he served in Army Special Forces units, including four tours in the Republic of Vietnam. Frank Miller's combat decorations include the Congressional Medal of Honor, the Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, the Air Medal, and six Purple Hearts. He received the Medal of Honor for his bravery in battle in 1971, when, despite his own severe wounds, he singlehandedly overcame four enemy attacks and safely evacuated the surviving members of his patrol. Upon Frank Miller's retirement from the Army in 1992, with the U.S. Army's highest enlisted rank of Command Sergeant Major, he continued to serve his country as a benefits counselor for the Department of Veterans' Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida. Former Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Henry H. Shelton, who knew Frank Miller personally, has described him as, "an icon to what service in the armed forces is all about." Sadly, in July of 2000, Frank Miller passed away in Florida. He is survived by his three children, and his brother, who also is a retired Command Sergeant Major of the Army's Special Forces. Frank Miller dedicated his life to serving our country. He was a loving father and brother, a true soldier's soldier, and a fellow American whose life impacted many people. Frank Miller's life should be remembered and appropriately commemorated. I hope to help honor his life by introducing legislation to name the Florida Veterans Affairs Regional Office in honor of Command Sergeant Major Franklin D. Miller. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before the Committee. Chairman ROCKEFELLER. Eloquent and discouraging because, when you said there were 1.7 million veterans in Florida, that is about the population of my entire State. [Laughter.] Senator Wellstone? Senator WELLSTONE. Thank you. I will try to be brief, Mr. Chairman, and I want to apologize, too, to our distinguished panelists. I am going to be in and out because of two other things going on at the same time. We have got before us 1680, which is the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act, and one of the reasons I want to make a brief statement is to send a signal to the Department of Defense and the administration. This legislation provides protection to National Guard personnel that are protecting our Nation's airports and other vulnerable public facilities, and what the bill does is provide civil relief to the National Guard personnel that have been mobilized by State Governors at the request of the President in support of an operation during a war or national emergency. The Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Act provides essential protections to service members on active duty, but it, unfortunately, only applies to National Guard personnel who are mobilized directly by the President and does not protect those who have been mobilized by Governors at the request of the President. That is the case with many men and women right now that are really protecting our airports and other public facilities. We are talking about 7,600 National Guard personnel in active duty in what is called title 32 status, and they are performing essential security missions. Let me talk about the Soldiers' and Sailors' Relief Act. This is really heartbreaking what is going on in the country. Even this does not provide the help we should be providing, but what this says is, look, these people, many of whom do not come from a lot of money, they are losing a lot of money every month, and at the very minimum we ought to protect them from exorbitant interest charges, and we ought to make sure they have relief from not being evicted from their homes or apartments, at the very minimum, or having cancellation of their life insurance. That is the protection that we give people, but we do not give these guard members that protection. It is just really almost outrageous what is going on. I want to insert, for the record, letters of support from The Military Coalition and the Enlisted Association of the National Guard. By the way, The Military Coalition is a consortium of 33 nationally prominent uniformed services and veterans organizations, representing 5.5 million current and former members of the seven uniformed services. [The information referred to follows:] EANGUS, ALEXANDRIA, VA, April 30, 2002. Hon. PAUL WELLSTONE, 136 Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC. DEAR SENATOR WELLSTONE: I would like to thank you on behalf of the members of the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States (EANGUS) for introducing S. 1680, to provide financial protections and civil relief to those National Guard personnel who have been mobilized by state governors as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks. National Guard soldiers and airmen called to active duty under Title 32 do not have the protection of the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act (SSCRA). National Guard and Reserve members called to active duty under Operation Enduring Freedom in Title 10 status do have that protection. The SSCRA was passed by Congress to provide protection for individuals called to active duty in any of tile military services. The SSCRA suspends certain civil obligations to enable service members to devote full attention to duty, The SSCRA protects the individual and his family from foreclosures, evictions, and installment contracts for the purchase of real or personal property if the service member's ability to make payments is "materially affected" by the military service. The SSCRA entities a person called to active duty to reinstatement of any health insurance that was in effect on the day before such service commenced, and was terminated during the period of service. It also protects the service member against termination of private life insurance policies during tile term of active service. I believe that all members of the National Guard performing active duty service for a national emergency or war at the call of the President should be entitled to protection under the SSCRA. Thank you for this legislation and its changes to the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act that will give National Guard members that protection. If there is anything that we can do to assist you, please feel free to ask. Respectfully, MSG MICHAEL P. CLINE (RET.), ARNG, Executive Director. THE MILITARY COALITION, Hon. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER, Chairman, Veterans Affairs Committee, Washington, DC. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Military Coalition, a consortium of 33 nationally prominent uniformed services and veterans organizations, representing more than 5.5 million current and former members of the seven uniformed services, plus their families and survivors, would like to bring to your attention a serious inequity for National Guard members who have been called to active duty for Operation Noble Eagle in Title 32 status. National Guard soldiers and airmen called to active duty under Title 32 do not have the protection of the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act (SSCRA). National Guard and Reserve members called to active duty under Operation Enduring Freedom in Title 10 status do have that protection. The SSCRA was passed by Congress to provide protection for individuals called to active duty in any of the military services. The SSCRA suspends certain civil obligations to enable service members to devote full attention to duty. The SSCRA protects the individual and his family from foreclosures, evictions, and installment contracts for the purchase of real or personal property if the service member's ability to make payments is "materially affected" by the military service. The SSCRA entitles a person called to active duty to reinstatement of any health insurance that was in effect on the day before such service commenced, and was terminated during the period of service. It also protects the service member against termination of private life insurance policies during the term of active service. Military Coalition believes that all members of the National Guard performing active duty service for a national emergency or war at the call of the President should be entitled to protection under the SSCRA. Please support S. 1680 and its changes to the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act that will give National Guard members that protection. Sincerely, THE MILITARY COALITION. Air Force Assn. Air Force Sergeants Assn. Army Aviation Assn. of America. Assn. of Military Surgeons of the United States. Assn. of the US Army. Commissioned Officers Assn. of the U.S. Public Health Service, Inc. CWO, & WO Assn., US Coast Guard. Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the US. Fleet Reserve Assn. Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. Veterans' Widows International Network, Inc. Marine Corps Reserve Officers Assn. National Order of Battlefield Commissions. Naval Reserve Assn. Nat'l Military Family Assn. Non Commissioned Officers Assn of the United States of America. Reserve Officers Assn. National Guard Assn. of the US. The Military Chaplains Assn. of the USA. The Retired Enlisted Assn. The Retired Officers Assn. United Armed Forces Assn. USCG Chief Petty Officers Assn. US Army Warrant Officers Assn. Veterans of Foreign Wars of the US. Senator WELLSTONE. Let me just kind of point it out this way, Mr. Chairman and others. You have title 10 status and title 32 status. It is impossible to explain why one Guard member in title 32 status, called up by the Governor at the request of the President, on guard at our airports, can lose his or her home, be foreclosed on, while the same Guard members who were doing border security that have been called up directly by the President are provided that protection. I mean, it makes no sense whatsoever. The committee, and I thank you for this, has requested from the DOD a letter of explanation for their opposition. We passed this, and put it on the Defense Department appropriations bill last session, and then it got stripped out at conference, and the DOD opposed it. I would like to know why. That is why I am speaking today at this committee taking, I will just take a couple of more minutes. They have said, well, the State should provide the protection. We have got a U.S. Supreme Court, Marquette National Bank of Minneapolis v. First Omaha Service Corporation saying that one State cannot regulate the interest rates of a national bank located in another State. So a State cannot do it. It has to be Federal protection. One of the primary benefits of this is to keep a 6-percent cap on interest rates. So States cannot enforce such laws. Let me just simply conclude this way. We are going to be calling on our Guard members to do a lot. They are going to be doing more border security, and it is just—again, if I had my way, and maybe this is just a very, this piece of legislation, frankly, may be too incremental, I do not know, maybe other Senators and other Reps have had the same experience, I do not know if you have, but if you talk to people out there at the airports, these are people who never had much money, and what they are losing every month is unbelievable. I mean, and this is going on and on, and we are going |